Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Software > Plug-ins & Actions (Photoshop and compatible)

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Oct 8, 2007, 1:49 PM   #1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 112
Default

Does anyone have any experience with using Lightroom's noise reduciton software and Noise Ninja? I am wondering how they compare?


stevem1928 is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Nov 8, 2007, 8:29 PM   #2
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

I'm surprised nobody has responded to this. So, I'll throw in a comment or two.

As a general rule, the noise reduction built into raw conversion tools is poor in comparsion to the dedicated tools like Noise Ninja, Noiseware or Neat Image (not to mention that you have to "tweak" the settings a lot more with the raw conversion tool's sliders versus a more sophisticated approach with the dedicated tools that often include the ability to create noise profiles that are camera specific).

My suggestion would be to try the products yourself and make up your own mind (if you haven't already).

Adobe has a trial version of Lightroom you can download and I think Noise Ninja works as a trial if you download it, too.


JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 23, 2007, 3:03 PM   #3
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 83
Default

Here's a pretty good comparison of MANY different tools. The most important conclusion is at the end, but the guy in question made a pretty thorough comparison and posted at least 3 pics as samples of how each noise filter did on it, with his conclusions. Based on what I saw from the pics, I went with Noise Ninja. HOWEVER, that said, there's tons here to decide on, w/example pics to look at, so I don't recommend you try to digest it all in one sitting; take your time and see what conclusion(s) you reach after digesting it all.
fotografo35 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 27, 2007, 11:46 PM   #4
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 99
Default

nobody have "silver bullet"
proper toold decision use 4 every(!!!) photo - requires a some experience and[a lot sometimes] handwork.

SkyShoot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 26, 2007, 9:16 AM   #5
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Dallas, Texas USA
Posts: 6,482
Default

I've played with noise reduction in Adobe Camera RAW and never found it to be as good as Neat Image. I've also played with RAW files from a couple Panasonic digicams in theincluded Silkypix software and found the noise reduction option in that softwareit to be very, very good....

http://gmchappell.smugmug.com/gallery/3986208#231772875

I recently purchasedthat Panasonic LX2 and have worked out a set of parameters in Silkypix for ISO settings from 100-800 and apply the appropriate one to each file as a starting point, tweeking as needed, and have been very impressed to the point I simply pass on doing anythingelse after conversion with files from that camera. The LX2 is a camera most would say provides unuseable files beyond ISO 200, but I have beenextremely please with what I've been able to consistently get up to ISO 400 shooting RAW, and have evenbeen pleasantly suprised witha few ISO 800 images.

Noise Reductiondiffers quite a bit in comparing Neat Image to whatAdobe Camera RAWand Silkypix do. I think you'll probably find some who prefer noise reduction in Lightroom if you ask around enough. Everyone has their own personal preferences, and some like how one system works better compared to others that someone else will like better. Find one that works best for the way you work and stick to it. It won't be what everyone else uses, but so what. All that matters is that it works for you.


Greg Chappell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 26, 2007, 9:30 AM   #6
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

I'd suggest trying Bibble Pro for raw conversion and noise reduction, too.

It's got some of the Noise Ninja algorithms and features built in. You don't get the full set of Noise Ninja features in Bibble like creating profiles, etc. (but, the basic Noise Ninja functionality is pretty good).

From what I've seen, Bibble does a *much* better job with raw conversion compared to Lightroom or PS3 using Adobe Camera Raw with higher ISO files from some cameras like the new Sony DSLR-A700.

The comparisons I've seen posted between Lightroom and Bibble using raw files from the new Sony DSLR-A700 were rather surprising (how bad a job Adobe Camera Raw is doing with the raw files from this model compared to the new Bibble 4.9.9), with Bibble delivering a finer grained noise pattern by default, versus a "watercolor" type noise pattern from Adobe Camera Raw.

My guess is that the newer demosaic algorithms in Camera Raw just don't mesh well with the raw files from some cameras like this one (as it does seem to do a pretty good job with most models).

I'd give Bibble a try and see what you think:

http://bibblelabs.com/


JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 10, 2010, 6:17 AM   #7
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: tr
Posts: 224
Default

does lightroom automatically profile image for noise reduction?

Last edited by imut; Mar 12, 2010 at 9:14 AM.
imut is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 7:03 PM.